Tuesday, November 1, 2011
They really, really, really called the wrong person.
As I read it, (and I always notice that no one else seems to read it this way, even though this is how it is written) the second amendment that Mr. LaPierre is so all fired up about protecting (get it? I put a gun joke in there...) states, *ahem, throat clearing*:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Did you catch that? Do you see the first part of that? The conditional part? The part that is almost universally ignored? A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE... Do you see that part? That's the condition upon which we are allowed to have guns in this country. In order to ensure our security, through a well regulated militia (do you hear that Michigan militias--hey! Do you guys still exist?), the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
So, if I want to bear arms in something other than a well regulated militia, that right may be infringed, because that's not the right that the second amendment protects. I might have to have regulations that our society deems reasonable for me to pack heat.
Does anyone else read it this way, because I believe that's how it's written? And how do I know that's how it's written?! Because I read the words that they so carefully chose, and I understand English, it being my mother tongue.
The first part is a condition, people!